On 09/04/12 1:25 PM, James B. Byrne wrote: > I have host A with eth0[aaa.bbb.ccc.A] and eth1[192.168.216.A] > > I have host B with eth0[aaa.bbb.ccc.B] and eth1[192.168.209.B] what are the subnet masks defined on 192.168.216.A and 192.168.209.B ? > and I have host C as the gateway with eth0 being the WAN and eth1 > being the LAN. Eth1 on C has the address [aaa.bbb.ccc.1] assigned to > it and has the alias [192.168.0.1] as well. assuming the answer to my above question is 255.255.255.0, then noone has a route to this 192.168.0.1 as its in an entirely different subnet. you can't overlap subnets with different size masks without creating some serious messes. > I want traffic from 192.168.216.A addressed to 192.168.209.B to go to > eth1 on B. Instead it goes to Eth0 on C where it dies as one would > expect. there's no route defined to do that, since 192.168.209.B is not in any network that A has knowlege of. A would need an IP in the B subnet, and B would need an IP in the A subnet for this to work. why do you have two seperate LAN subnets? are you running two seperate LANs ? there have to be some really good reasons before I create anything this messy. for instance... host A with eth0[aaa.bbb.ccc.A] and eth1[192.168.216.A] and eth1[192.168.209.A] host B with eth0[aaa.bbb.ccc.B] and eth1[192.168.209.B] and eth1[192.168.216.B] now A can reach B via its eth1 as it now has a route to 192.168.216/24 -- john r pierce N 37, W 122 santa cruz ca mid-left coast _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos